Filters for unused sockets?

My domestic phone system has an used socket. Is a filter essential for
broadband given that the socket is never used?

--
(E-Mail Removed)

On 26/01/2004 Peter Crosland opined:-
> My domestic phone system has an used socket. Is a filter essential for
> broadband given that the socket is never used?

No! You only need a filter in the sockets used by either a phone, or
your modem, though some would argue with the latter need.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org

Harry Bloomfield wrote:
> On 26/01/2004 Peter Crosland opined:-
>> My domestic phone system has an used socket. Is a filter essential
>> for broadband given that the socket is never used?
>
> No! You only need a filter in the sockets used by either a phone, or
> your modem, though some would argue with the latter need.

Sorry I'm nit picking but it's any equipment which is plugged into a
socket/connected to line (modems, faxes, Satellite boxes, burglar alarms,
extension bells {yes extension bells}, CLI boxes & everything else which
I've forgotten, not just phones)..

As I said nit picking but you'd be suprised (well maybe not) at the number
of people who do get it wrong....

In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
Harry Bloomfield <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> On 26/01/2004 Peter Crosland opined:-
>> My domestic phone system has an used socket. Is a filter essential for
>> broadband given that the socket is never used?
>
> No! You only need a filter in the sockets used by either a phone, or
> your modem, though some would argue with the latter need.
>
Though if you've got a memory like mine, I'd suggest sticking a little
note over the socket to remind you that it will need a filter should
you want to plug any phone-like device into it at some point in the
future.

--
Tim Clark

> As I said nit picking but you'd be suprised (well maybe not) at the number
> of people who do get it wrong....

A very valid point and I should have made clear that no equipment is or will
be connected to the socket in question. Obviously if it has to be used then
another filter will be required. I can well believe you!

"Peter Crosland" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> As I said nit picking but you'd be suprised (well maybe not) at the number
>> of people who do get it wrong....
>
>A very valid point and I should have made clear that no equipment is or will
>be connected to the socket in question. Obviously if it has to be used then
>another filter will be required. I can well believe you!
>

Aren't there inline filters which one could fit near the master socket
and which would stop the RF muck getting to the rest of the house?


Peter.
--
Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
E-mail replies to (E-Mail Removed) but remove the X and the Y.
Please do NOT copy usenet posts to email - it is NOT necessary.

Peter wrote:
> "Peter Crosland" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>> As I said nit picking but you'd be suprised (well maybe not) at
>>> the number of people who do get it wrong....
>>
>> A very valid point and I should have made clear that no equipment
>> is or will be connected to the socket in question. Obviously if it
>> has to be used then another filter will be required. I can well
>> believe you!
>>
>
> Aren't there inline filters which one could fit near the master
> socket and which would stop the RF muck getting to the rest of the
> house?

Yes, but often the PC isn't where the master socket is.

Met up with one a days or so ago, where the master was hidden in a void,
which the stairs went around & only access was via a 3x3 ft shaft. Don't
think they'd be enough room for a PC in there let alone a person to use
it...